The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Destroying DACA
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

This is causing a lot of grumbling among immigration patriots:

It shouldn’t. Congress is an amnesty killing field. The bipartisan swamp attempted it in 2007. Middle America grabbed the pitchforks, surrounded the palaces of their congressional Cloud People, and demanded the McCain-Kennedy be destroyed. It was.

The bipartisan swamp made another major attempt in 2013, when Marco Rubio partnered with bosom buddies McCain (viva la brain cancer), Graham (viva la physiognomy), and Jeff Flake (viva la Kelli Ward) and four Democrats to bring amnesty back to life. Middle America went for the pitchforks again, and the resurrection attempt was snuffed out.

There have been other congressional amnesty attempts over the last couple of decades that have garnered less attention–because they didn’t make it as far–while meeting similar fates.

Trump is taunting his bipartisan congressional opposition here. He’s daring them to express their true intentions with the 2018 mid-terms looming. And he’s framing the issue in a way that puts the concerns and well-being of American citizens first:

He’s setting a trap for the swamp dwellers to walk into. It’s not 4D chess, it’s checkers. He’s playing it well.

This is our cue to act. Ping your congress critters. Find your house member here and your senators here. It only takes a couple minutes. Their aids tally the “fors” and “againsts”. Make your opposition known. Don’t overthink it. Feel free to cut and paste the following that I sent to my trio:

DACA is an unconstitutional executive action enacted against the will of the American public and without the consent of our elected representatives. It should never have taken effect and should never go back into effect again.

Illegal aliens must not be rewarded for violating the laws of the land, whether they’re sixteen or sixty years old. We have our own problems to deal with. We do not need to be creating more. America first!

The only thing necessary for the triumph of demographic replacement to prevail is for good people to do nothing. Act!

(Republished from The Audacious Epigone by permission of author or representative)
Hide 30 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Hey guys, here's this big stink bomb. I'll leave it w/you for awhile & u'll take good care of it. Y don't u give it a toss? Kno u want 2!

  2. Excellent post for we lazy men; a simple copy and paste ane that's all she wrote.

    Who can predict how they will vote but most of the crummy class in DC are more concerned with their own reelections than anything else

  3. What does "if they can't, I will revisit this issue" mean?? At least Romney (generally disgusting and establishment as he is) said concretely he would veto the DREAM Act if elected.

  4. Giovanni,

    Right. And he fulfilled a campaign promise in the same stroke.


    Based on my anecdotal experience–though I make it a point to ask regularly–very few take even so simple a step, especially those in the 'silent majority'.


    Trump concretely said he would repeal DACA. Going after gangbangers–the Steinle killers–is politically easy. This is tougher, and he's prudently trying to rouse his public base of support to join him in tackling it. We need to heed that call.

  5. Excuse me but "This is our queue to act" would mean a line we needed to stand in to act. Cue your editor.

  6. Vanderleun,

    Oops, thanks. Fixed. And about that editor–proofreading would probably do the trick. It's usually pretty easy to tell when I've rushed a post out.

  7. > Who can predict how they will vote but most of the crummy class in DC are more concerned with their own reelections than anything else

    Dave Brat beating Eric Cantor was enough to kill the Gang of 8 amnesty bill. They want to pass it but they'd rather stay in office instead so this will effectively end DACA. If the Senate will vote for it, the House will vote against it. In the one in a million chance that DACA actually passes the House, I could see Trump vetoing it where that will be that.

    I'm not worried. Enough GOP shitlords know that voting for DACA is a career killer and voting against DACA will ensure that they have another term in office. There will be a couple GOPe traitors but the House will snuff out any chances of it passing.

  8. Sorry for the doublepost but in many ways Trump is doing the GOP a favor for the midterms. Ending DACA is popular. It's a great way for GOP incumbents to keep their seat if they vote against it and it's a great way for GOP challengers to take a Democrat/GOPe to the mat to get them to justify why they voted in favor of keeping DACA. It's a pretty good strategy in my opinion.

  9. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I call BULL.

    As with Trump's kicking the debt can down the road 3 months
    (when his own budget will be rejected anyway, forcing a shutdown or surrender then),
    there is NOTHING to be gained with this
    "exposing the amnesty crowd" in the 2018 cycle.

    This is the same electorate which has re-elected
    cr*pweasels like Ryan, McConnell, McCain et al OVER AND OVER.

    Trump has the first 2 years to accomplish *anything* of substance;
    he is merely gambling that he can "improve" Congress.

    I'd like some more proof that he's doing more than squandering his momentum.

  10. > I'd like some more proof that he's doing more than squandering his momentum.

    I disagree with this whole post but one thing to keep in mind is that we were hurtling down Clown World at faster and faster speeds. Hillary ran as an accelerationist: she wanted to continue to enact Obama's pozprog agenda but harder and faster.

    Trump at a minimum has stopped that. In addition, TPP isn't even discussed anymore. Nobody is counting on amnesty happening and by all accounts hundreds of thousands are being deported or just leaving on their own. He launched one missile in Syria, we would have been fighting Assad if it was anyone else.

    I'm not exactly thrilled about Trump's performance but him slamming shut the accelerationist neoliberal globalist agenda is definitely noteworthy in the current political climate. We need to do our part by voting out the clowns who keep trying to get in Trump's way. It'll take time, as most realignments do. I do believe we are undergoing a realignment. Major political shifts rarely change on a dime.

    I'm not raising the red flags just yet.

  11. AE — I am not optimistic at this point.

    As Ann Coulter reminds us, there have been 0 miles of walls built. Trump seems to be shilling for DACA. It seems it his hand was forced to end DACA by the lawsuit and he had to end it in the face of a judge who was ready to make an injunction against it. He keeps assuring the Dreamers on twitter.

    Trump endorsed the Chamber of Commerce guy Luther Strange against the conservative Roy Moore in Alabama.

    Trump pushed out nationalists Bannon and Gorka — or apparently did not object to their leaving. Bannon and Gorka both said in effect Trumpism is dead. They would know.

    The House is lead by Paul Ryan and the Senate is led by Mitch McConnell. You do not need most Repubs on board with amnesty — you just need those two to bring it to a vote. It is getting 100% Dem support since Dems are much further to the left than they were in 2008.

    Would Trump veto a Dreamer amnesty bill? I doubt it, just look at his twitter feed. He is eager to sign almost anything at this point.

  12. It is great that Trump supports the Raise Act but where is his vaunted negotiating skill? Why didn't he end DACA on his own?

    The wall was already approved by congress years and years ago. Why not just use some money in some of the agencies and start building?

    Trump can just start building the wall now, it was already legislated!!!

  13. The debt ceiling is a huge negotiating tool, which Trump does not seem to be using.

    Maybe when Roy Moore wins in Alabama there will be a shakeup?

  14. "This is causing a lot of grumbling among immigration patriots…..It shouldn't. Congress is an amnesty killing field."

    I have to disagree with this. As you pointed out, the last time this was attempted was in 2007. In 2009, the Republicrats didn't have a single vote in favor of Universal Health Care. A year later, it was a done deal. And this year, after promising for 8 years to repeal Obamacare, they couldn't even successfully do this in the Senate, even while having majorities in both Houses and controlling the White House. You are still using a 2007 perception to predict what whores in DC will do. Believe me, the cucking on amnesty will reach levels you wouldn't think possible. You've already seen how this will be played. "Cruel". "Unconstitutional", even though it was an Executive Order and can be changed by another Executive Order. Trump has compromised on other things, like the budget. Let's see what he does. It is possible that some of the RINO's might actually be defeated in 2018. They will gladly exit the playing field, with a huge lifetime pension, special healthcare, Secret Service protection paid for by the chumps….I mean taxpayers, and a few million dollars in slush funds that will help them assuage the hurt in taking one for their masters.

  15. If Trump cucks on amnesty (God I hate to be using Trump and cuck in the same sentence) then there isn't enough fight in the GOP outside of Trump to stop it, unless there is a different majority leader in the House or Senate.

    I hope Trump will be loyal to his base but only time will tell. Trump doesn't seem to have been very loyal to the many Trump supporters when it came to fill his administration.

    His admin is filled with people who piled on after he won, with precious few MAGA people.

    Maybe Don Jr. will buck up his dad?

  16. My sense is that Trump is leaving things open-ended. Over the years, he's wavered between very hardline statements on DACA and very weak ones. On the one hand, Trump knows he has gotten as far as he has from his stance on immigration. He knows how much we resent DACA, whether it's "muh Constitution" or just not wanting more damn welfare sponges and vote rigging.

    On the other hand, Trump has a soft spot for kids, and it's a PR nightmare to deport young people who speak fluent, unaccented English to Mexico. While I don't want DACA recipients or any other illegals to remain in America, I recognize how it's genuinely painful to be deported from a place where you've spent most of your life. While I ultimately believe law is law, and illegals put far more strain on the US than what they contribute, I still won't feel schadenfreude about Dreamers going back home.

    Well, not really:

    Again, Trump is leaving his options open. He could cuck if Congress comes out hard in creating a new DACA, but if the Congressional effort falls apart and the cucks who support DACA, like Jeff Flake, get the boot in the primaries (#MAGA2018), then we'll be in a stronger position on immigration altogether.

  17. If we get congress to kill DACA, the door is wide open for all kinds of immigration restrictionism. This is the single toughest aspect of immigration to tackle. Trump is creating the possibility that all three branches shut DACA down in near lockstep. The judiciary shut down DAPA and would've shut down DACA. The executive preempted, and now it's getting kicked to congress. If congress kills it, it is dead, dead, dead.

    The zeitgeist is *more* favorable for immigration restrictionism than it was in 2007, which may have been the contemporary nadir for us–the recession hadn't kicked in so the economy was good, Dems controlled both houses, Bush was Mr. Amnesty, all the arms of the Cathedral were for amnesty, too, we didn't have the populist social media reach that we do now, and still amnesty was defeated. It can be defeated again. All it takes is some work from us.

    For those who insist on going the black pill here, at least take a couple of minutes to contact your congress critters.

  18. Yes it is an interesting situation.

    Was quite excited last week when Trump said he was repealing DACA. Even my wife was pumped about it.

    Now this week the above tweets have introduced a worrying element, as though Trump will support a congressional move to legalize and citizenize the 'dreamers'.

    At the same time I agree that anytime regular voters can be confronted by such immigration issues it is a huge plus for our side, as they seem to inevitably oppose any kind of amnesty.

    Yet I am no longer so willing to attribute Trump's motives to 4-Dimensional Chess, etc.

    This could be good too though in that if the economy falls off the cliff in Q3 then this discussion will be had in the shadow of that anxiety, which is more likely to force a rationale response from folks.

    Finally I second the contacting of congress-critters AE. Actually much more effective pound for pound than most folks realize, as the Republicucks are always scared of ornery constituents back in flyover country getting too angry. We just need to make them even MORE SCARED of that so it exceeds their fear off offending the Sorosburgs.

  19. Ae, I hope you are right. Maybe i need to temper my expectations. I was out there in front of the White House on Friday as the LONE demonstrator against DACA, mobbed by DACA supporters so that the secret service had to make them back off. I will call congress, already tried. I wont make 3 calls, i'll make 100. We'll see.

  20. "Actually much more effective pound for pound than most folks realize, as the Republicucks are always scared of ornery constituents back in flyover country getting too angry."

    Eric Cantor was seen as a rising star in the GOP and a hardliner within the Tea Party. Of course, he was also an open borders fanatic, and hence lost his job in the 2014 primaries to an immigration restrictionist.

    Maybe it was possible to dismiss that as a fluke in 2014, but after Trump ran on immigration and won in 2016, I'm sure most Republican congressmen dread getting the Eric Cantor treatment. Republicans might be tempted to go open borders once they're in DC's climate, but a steady stream of messages from their constituents to oppose DACA should set all but the most shameless cucks straight.


    "French with recent immigrant background (at least one great-grandparent) 33%"

    Yikes. One cannot overstate the horror and shock of ancestral white lands being transformed into extensions of the brown and black Middle-Earth. If France et al go down the same road that the US did in the 70's and 80's (allowing non-whites to dominate large areas, greater political and social clout afforded to non-whites, etc.), eventually the Slavs and Balts, if they could find it in their stony hearts, would have to offer refugee admission to Western whites being driven from the lands they settled many generations ago. Racially conscious whites would be better off starting a neo-crusades from the safety of Eastern Europe, given that all other heretofore white countries avowedly, under pressure from neo-liberal crooks and suicidal sentimentalists, have abandoned the notion that whites deserve their own lands. A neo-crusades is simply not possible from the geographic West, given that a massive technological/legal/informational apparatus exists to marginalize whites who dare suggest that demographics are in a crisis. When even "conservatives" deride the idea that America or wherever ought to concern itself with staying genetically Western, well, we're screwed, aren't we? The snowy expanse of Russia, and whichever neighboring countries stay ahead of "color" revolutions, are all that we've got left. For the time being, Denmark or wherever is doing alright, but just give it time. First they came for urban areas like NYC, LA, Houston, Miami, etc. and we did nothing. Then they came for many suburbs of Bos-Wash and California, and we did nothing. Then they came for the Midwest, and we did nothing…….

    We can't delude ourselves that globalists will one day sit back and say, "alright, that's good for a few decades". Nope. We can't adequately defend ourselves anymore, not when they keep trying to shred the 1st amendment and even that withstanding, employers do not tolerate pro-white speech. Two solutions: more whites getting some balls, banding together, and forcefully demanding a change in ideology at the top or failing that, wholesale replacement of our leadership with better people (aka rebellion). Or: renouncing citizenship and residency in the West with the agreement that one or more Eastern countries will admit Western defectors who have a proven history of not hating white culture.

  22. One hope: Post-Millennial generations will have grown up fully under the horror of obnoxiously enforced multi-culturalism and more importantly, multi-racial societies. Previous generations had a "choice" over what degree of diversity they'd be exposed to. When most parts of America were all white or at least near all white areas, crybaby hypocrite whites could always bemoan "white-privilege" and feel an obligation to do more to help POC, from the safety of favorable demographics and economics (The Silent Generation grew up in an America that was 90% white, few were immigrants, and America was at it's economic peak; any wonder why they were so sincerely enthusiastic about dieversity?). This is all ancient history to Gen Z, who won't remember patriotism after war victories, or widely felt economic booms, or having secure and more mono-racial demographics that make one cavalier about racial issues and resource distribution.

  23. Julian,

    Yeah, I've always been skeptical of the 4D chess stuff. This isn't that complicated though. Amnesties never pass in congress, even when said congress is controlled by Democrats. Without demographic stabilization, at some point that will cease to be the case, but I don't think this is it. We're not passive spectators in that, of course. It's time to act.

    I agree that anytime regular voters can be confronted by such immigration issues it is a huge plus for our side, as they seem to inevitably oppose any kind of amnesty

    Overwhelmingly so, on the order of 10-to-1 in opposition. And that comes from a small base of total contacts. With issues that motivate like the National Question does, we're still looking at fewer than 1 in 100 constituents making contact. We can bring some heat.

    Flake is at risk of being primaried in Arizona. The DACA fight will take place under the looming shadow of mid-terms and of the dog-and-pony show that'll happen as we get to another budget ceiling charade in December. People thinking about their country's enormous debt will not put them in the mood to give away the store to invaders and their scofflaw children.

  24. Parenthetically, that's Julian Langness, who gave a rousing AmRen speech this year. I have to say Derb's was my favorite because I'm Derb's #1 fanboy. That formality aside, his was my next favorite.

  25. Dan,

    Is there video of the incident that you are aware of? Given that you're more likely to find a Trump supporters among blacks than among DC residents, try not to get discouraged.


    Yes, we're on the same page. That gives me confidence.


    But we now have tools–albeit the tools the Cathedral is trying to take away from us–that we've never had before. If you have a pulse and access to the internet, the fight isn't over.

  26. Modestly encouraging? What is it you are referring to?

  27. The post shared on September 8th at 11:30am. Doesn't appear that I'm able to link directly to it so you'll have to scroll down just a bit. Daughter-in-law talks about DACA. Sounds pretty good.

  28. Modestly encouraging? Not to me. Heart and compassion? No mention of security or restricting immigration. We already know congress is full of turncoats on this.

  29. Dan,

    At least she describes DACA negatively and criticizes its creation. It's vague per usual.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS